Chemical Weapons Convention

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Bob Ainsworth) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The UK's chemical protection programme is designed to protect against the use of chemical weapons. Such a programme is permitted by the Chemical Weapons Convention, with which the United Kingdom is fully compliant. Under the terms of the convention, we are required to provide information annually to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). In accordance with the Government's commitment to openness, I am placing in the House of Commons Library a copy of the summary that has been provided to the organisation outlining the UK's chemical protection programme in 2008.

Correction to Commons Written Answer

Lord Darzi of Denham: My right honourable friend the Minister of State, Department of Health (Dawn Primarolo) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I regret that the Written Answer given to the honourable Member for East Worthing and Shoreham on 10 July 2008 (Official Report, col. 1800W), and the Written Answer given to the honourable Member for North Norfolk on 11 November 2008 (Official Report, col. 1044W), were incorrect. They should not have been based on monthly data on prescribing from December 2007 onwards. The NHS Business Services Authority processes for pricing prescriptions changed in mid-December 2007 and I have been advised that they cannot reliably estimate the prescribing of specific therapeutic groups for a specific age exemption category on a monthly basis from that time.
	The correct reply for the Written Answer given to the honourable Member for East Worthing and Shoreham is that the information requested is not available.
	The correct reply for the Written Answer given to the honourable Member for North Norfolk is that the department does not hold information on the number of people aged 65 and over who have depression or have been diagnosed with depression. However, estimates derived from the Business Services Authority's exemption category estimates and national prescribing data indicate that between October 2006 and September 2007 the proportion of prescriptions for antidepressants dispensed to those aged 60 and over was 41.5 per cent.

Correction to Commons Written Answers and Written Ministerial Statements

Lord Adonis: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Jim Fitzpatrick) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	Subsequent to Written Answers I gave on 29 January and 2 April 2008 and my Written Ministerial Statements of 17 July 2008 to Parliamentary Questions on data handling, I would like to inform the House that further investigation has revealed additional information.
	There are further instances of data being accessible overseas to be included in the response to the honourable Member for Chipping Barnet (Question 175768) (Official Report, 29 January 2008, col. 197W, and 17 July, cols. 54-55 WS).
	On behalf of the Driving Standards Agency and the Secretary of State two sector skills councils, Skills for Logistics and GoSkills, operate and manage a joint approval unit for periodic training (JAUPT). JAUPT uses a US-based data processing company, Salesforce.com, to process some of the data about the registration of the training courses, which included the following personal information:
	telephone numbers and e-mail addresses of employers, training providers, operators or suitably qualified individuals;name of person from the centre who made the application for it to become an approved centre;and name and qualifications of all trainers delivering courses.
	We have received confirmation from JAUPT that personal data are no longer processed in the US on behalf of DSA in relation to this activity.
	Asite Ltd runs a web-based system for the department for tendering purposes. The data are held in the UK and backed up to the US, and there is user administration access from India. The data include names, e-mail addresses and telephone numbers of about 150 individuals to allow them to access the web-based data room.
	The Highways Agency uses Le Crossing Company Ltd, a French contractor, in relation to payment of tolls. Personal data of account holders using the Dartford Crossing toll system are stored in the UK but can be accessed from France for maintenance purposes. The data include:
	the name, address and telephone numbers of applicants for a dart tag; and the bank account details of holders of a dart tag who pay by direct debit.
	The Highways Agency uses Gallup for staff satisfaction surveys. Data stored in the US, including personal data, are as follows:
	the names and line managers of permanent Highways Agency staff; andthe responses these staff have made to a staff satisfaction questionnaire.
	The information above, about Saleforce.com and Gallup, should also be added to in response to Question 197148 from the honourable Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr (Official Report, 2 April 2008, cols. 1010-1011W) and 17July (Official Report, col. 54-55 WS).

Energy: Carbon Reduction

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Today I am publishing the third consultation on the carbon reduction commitment (CRC).
	The Climate Change Act, which received Royal Assent in November last year, set legally binding targets for the UK to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050.
	To meet this target, the Climate Change Act provided powers to create emissions trading schemes. The CRC will be the first scheme created under these powers. We have worked closely with the devolved Administrations in developing a scheme that will work across the UK. We believe the CRC will be the world's first mandatory carbon dioxide emissions trading scheme to auction all allowances. It will cover large non energy-intensive organisations from both the public and private sector such as all British central government departments, supermarkets, banks, local authorities, the National Health Service and universities. The sectors of the economy covered by the CRC account for approximately 10 per cent of the UK's emissions. The CRC will start in 2010 and after a three-year introductory phase we will introduce a declining cap on the amount of carbon this sector of the economy can emit. Government will take the views of the independent Committee on Climate Change into account when setting the cap to ensure that the environmental goals of the scheme will be met. The CRC is expected to deliver emissions savings of at least 4 million tons of CO2 per year by 2020.
	By harnessing financial and reputational drivers, the CRC will encourage participating organisations to use energy more efficiently, thereby reducing their energy costs and saving up to £1 billion by 2020. We expect the market for energy-efficient technology and energy services to grow in response to the CRC, spurring innovation and helping to lay the foundations for new, low carbon economic growth.
	We have worked closely with stakeholders in business and the public sector to develop the scheme, and have consulted twice on the scheme design and implementation. The CRC will capture a diverse range of organisations, so we have listened to the perspectives and experiences expressed—and these have been critical to the development of the scheme. I therefore believe that the CRC will successfully drive improvements in energy efficiency in a large sector of the economy.
	I have today placed in the Libraries of the House, and published on the Department of Energy and Climate Change website, a consultation package on the draft CRC order, which will form the statutory basis of the scheme. This includes the CRC consultation document, the CRC draft order, the CRC user guide and a regulatory impact assessment.
	The consultation document:
	describes CRC policy as determined over the course of the two previous consultations;details the changes in policy since the last consultation;seeks views on the draft order and in particular if it results in unintended consequences; andseeks views on certain policy details.
	I have also launched today a review of climate change agreements (CCAs). The current scheme ends in 2013 and, subject to state aid approval, the scheme will be extended to 2017. CCAs have been highly successful in reducing emissions in the energy intensive sector. In 2006, the latest period for which information is available, sectors saved 16.4 million tons of CO2 and an estimated £1.5 billion in energy costs, when measured against baselines. This review provides an opportunity to simplify the agreements for the benefit of business and government, and to ensure coherence with other climate change policy.
	The proposals in these consultation documents will help us reduce the carbon emissions from these sectors of the economy in the most cost-effective way possible. They will bring us one step closer to our goal of creating a thriving low carbon economy.

EU: Environment Council

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Hilary Benn) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I and my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (Ed Miliband) represented the UK at the Environment Council in Brussels on 2 March.
	Member states adopted council conclusions on the further development of the EU position on a comprehensive post-2012 climate agreement as a contribution to the spring council. These covered mitigation, the role of the carbon market, adaptation to the effects of inevitable climate change, financial support, technology co-operation and capacity building, and international climate change governance.
	On genetically modified organisms (GMOs) the Commission's proposals were rejected and the Austrian and Hungarian safeguards on GM-maize lines MON810 and T25 were endorsed.
	Member states also discussed the proposed industrial emissions directive, which consolidates and amends several pieces of industrial emissions legislation, including the Integrated Pollution Prevention Control (IPPC) Directive. The UK broadly welcomed the Commission proposal, but had concerns about the large combustion plant provisions, seeking necessary flexibilities. The UK raised concerns about setting widespread minimum requirements and extending the scope to smaller combustion plants and to additional poultry installations.
	The council also adopted a council decision on whaling ahead of the next three annual and inter-sessional meetings of the International Whaling Convention (IWC). The decision sets out the EU's position with regard to proposals for amendments to the International Convention on Regulation of Whaling and its schedule to be taken at the next three annual meetings of the IWC.
	Finally, Ministers adopted council conclusions on the contribution to the spring Council (non-climate change). The conclusions cover the European economic recovery plan, sustainable consumption and production, environmental technologies, natural resources, biodiversity, beyond GDP and better regulation.
	Under "any other business" member states exchanged views on the fall in demand for recyclate materials, underlining the importance of maintaining public confidence in recycling and flagging the need for further Commission monitoring, analysis and, if necessary, action.

NHS: Next-stage Review

Lord Darzi of Denham: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Health Services, Department of Health (Ben Bradshaw) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	We are today laying before Parliament the Government's response (Cm 7558) to the Health Select Committee report NHS Next-stage Review, which was published on 13 January.
	High Quality Care for All, the final report of the NHS next-stage review published in June 2008, set out a vision of an NHS that gives patients and the public more information and choice, works in partnership and has quality of care at its heart.
	High Quality Care for All set out the national framework that will enable and support the delivery of the ambitious visions for local health and healthcare published by strategic health authorities in May and June 2008. It is these visions, based on the work of local clinicians and unprecedented engagement with patients, staff and the public, that are at the heart of the NHS next-stage review.
	The committee's report concluded that there was much to commend in the review, welcoming in particular the open and consultative way in which it had been conducted and its emphasis on quality and leadership within the NHS.
	The committee was concerned that weaknesses in primary care trust (PCT) commissioning meant that its implementation might be slower and more uneven than hoped. While welcoming the provision of additional primary care services that the next-stage review commits to, the committee emphasised that this needs careful management and evaluation of its impact locally.
	The government response welcomes the committee's report and sets out the measures that the Government have taken to improve PCT commissioning through the ambitious world-class commissioning programme. It sets out the Government's commitment to growing and strengthening primary care and explains that delivery of the additional services the review commits to is a response to patient demand. Their delivery will be locally led and evidence-based.
	Today's publication is in the Library and copies are available to honourable Members from the Vote Office.

Regional Spatial Strategy: East Midlands

Baroness Andrews: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Sadiq Khan) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Today my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government is publishing the East Midlands Regional Plan (Regional Spatial Strategy) (RSS), which covers the period 2006-26. Also published are the final sustainability appraisal and habitats regulations assessment plus other supporting documents. This replaces RSS8, issued in March 2005, with the exception of part of the Milton Keynes and South Midlands sub-regional strategy, which remains extant.
	The regional spatial strategy forms part of the statutory development plan for every local authority in the east Midlands and sets the framework for the production of local development frameworks and local transport plans. It provides the spatial plan for the development of the region, and the policy framework for employment, housing, transport and the environment.
	The existing strategy, RSS8, which is replaced today, was published in March 2005. The draft revision of the RSS was submitted to the Government in September 2006 by the East Midlands Regional Assembly. It was tested by an examination in public lasting eight weeks during summer 2007, and the panel report was published in November 2007. Proposed changes were published on 22 July 2008 followed by a 12-week public consultation ending on 17 October. We received 2,549 comments from 735 respondents.
	We have carefully examined all the responses. The result is that we have rebased the housing figures from 2006 rather than 2001 to bring the plan more up to date. We have defined total housing provision for all authorities, apart from Northamptonshire, where figures were not subject to review, setting out the total that local authorities need to plan for up to 2026. Responding to representations, we have removed the five-year phasing of the housing provision which was introduced in the proposed changes and we have responded to the concerns of local authorities around Nottingham by reducing the level of increase for the city and adjusting the balance of numbers required between urban and rural areas for the suburban authorities, which reflect their concerns about land availability. Total provision in the Lincolnshire coastal districts of East Lindsey, Boston and South Holland remains limited and will be reviewed after a coastal strategy has been completed. A small adjustment to remove some double counting in the Leicestershire area has also been made.
	The result is a total provision of 430,300 dwellings over the plan period, compared to 408,360 at the draft stage and 434,094 at proposed changes.
	We have made some minor amendments to the text to clarify the position on climate change measures for local authorities which do not have an up-to-date development plan document. We believe this clarification will reduce the risk of confusion.
	We have also made some changes to the pitch requirement figures for Gypsies, Travellers and showpeople, which clarify the timescales and remove some errors in the use of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation assessments. Other minor changes and updating have also been done.
	Copies of relevant documents have been placed in the Library of the House and will be provided to the region's MPs and MEPs, local authorities, the East Midlands Regional Assembly and the East Midlands Development Agency. The regional plan and all related documents are also available to download from the website of the Government Office for the East Midlands at www.gos.gov.uk/goem/planning/regional-planning/.

Schools: Admissions

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools and Learners (Sarah McCarthy-Fry) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Schools Admissions Code has transformed the admissions system. We have outlawed unfair and covert admission practices which disadvantaged low-income families and increased social segregation. We have extended the role of the independent schools adjudicator, allowing him to look into any admission arrangements that parents feel are unfair or overly complicated as well as requiring him to monitor compliance and report annually to the Secretary of State.
	The Information as to Provision of Education (England) Regulations 2008 require local authorities (LAs) to submit data to the department on how many families received an offer of a place at one of their preferred secondary schools. This year, on Monday 2 March, almost 547,000 families were advised at which secondary school their child was being offered a place.
	Today we are publishing validated data, based on returns from 149 LAs, showing that across the country 83.2 per cent of families received an offer at their first preference school. This is an increase of 1.1 percentage points on last year's figures. A further 8.4 per cent of families were offered a place at their second preference school and, in total, 94.6 per cent were offered a place at one of their three preferred schools. I am placing a copy of these data in the Library of the House.
	There is considerable variation nationally. Outside of London, 86 per cent of parents were offered a place in their first preference school. For Greater London, this figure is 66 per cent.However across London, over 93 per cent of pupils have been offered a place at one of their chosen schools.
	Parents have the right of appeal against any application that has been turned down; and over the summer, local authorities and schools will be reallocating places where others have moved address or chosen a different education for their child.
	Parents now have a fairer choice because of our action to enforce the code, and also more real choice because there has been a transformation in the quality of our state schools. More schools are judged by Ofsted as outstanding and over 78,000 more young people are leaving school with five good GCSEs, including English and mathematics, than did so 10 years ago. In 1998, there were 1,600 schools where fewer than 30 per cent of children achieved five or more good GCSEs including English and mathematics. Now there are just 440 below this minimum standard, and our National Challenge programme is working to ensure that all schools reach this standard by 2011.
	We are continuing to look at ways to improve the admissions system. The Secretary of State has recently asked the independent schools adjudicator to report on how admissions authorities are using random allocation.

Terrorism: Control Orders

Lord West of Spithead: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Policing, Crime and Security (Vernon Coaker) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Section 14(1) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (the 2005 Act) requires the Secretary of State to report to Parliament as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of every relevant three-month period on the exercise of the control order powers during that period.
	The level of information provided will always be subject to slight variations based on operational advice.
	Control orders continue to be an essential tool to protect the public from terrorism, particularly where it is not possible to prosecute individuals for terrorism-related activity and, in the case of foreign nationals, where they cannot be removed from the UK.
	As stated in previous quarterly statements on control orders, control order obligations are tailored to the individual concerned and are based on the terrorism-related risk that each individual poses. Each control order is kept under regular review to ensure that obligations remain necessary and proportionate. The Home Office continues to hold control order review groups (CORGs) every quarter, with representation from law enforcement and intelligence agencies, to keep the obligations in every control order under regular and formal review and to facilitate a review of appropriate exit strategies. The CORGs for this quarter fall outside of this reporting period and will be covered in the next report. However, meetings were held in relation to the control orders in force within this reporting period on an ad-hoc basis as specific issues arose.
	During the period 11 December 2008 to 10 March 2009, two non-derogating control orders were made and served; three non-derogating control orders were made but not served; and two control orders were renewed in accordance with Section 2(6) of the 2005 Act.
	In total, 17 control orders are currently in force, six of which are in respect of British citizens. Five individuals subject to a control order live in the Metropolitan Police Service area; the remaining individuals live in other police force areas. All of these control orders are non-derogating. One individual has been charged with breaching a control order obligation; no prosecutions for breaching a control order were completed during this reporting period.
	During this reporting period, 62 modifications of control order obligations were made. Twenty-one requests to modify control order obligations were refused. A right of appeal is provided for by Section 10(1) of the 2005 Act against a decision by the Secretary of State to renew a non-derogating control order or to modify an obligation imposed by a non-derogating control order without consent. One appeal has been lodged with the High Court by a controlled person in relation to the renewal of a control order during this reporting period. A right of appeal is also provided for by Section 10(3) of the 2005 Act against decisions by the Secretary of State to refuse a request by a controlled person to revoke their order and/or to modify any obligation under the order. One appeal has been lodged with the High Court by a controlled person relating to a refusal to modify his control order.
	Three judgments have been handed down by the High Court in control order cases during this reporting period in relation to substantive reviews of the individual control orders under Section 3(10) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005. In Secretary of State for the Home Department v AR a judgment was handed down on 19 December 2008. The court ruled in favour of the Secretary of State and upheld the control order and all of the obligations. A judgment was handed down in the case of Secretary of State for the Home Department v AU on 20 January 2009. The court ruled in favour of the Secretary of State and upheld the control order and all the obligations. In Secretary of State for the Home Department v GG&NN a judgment was handed down on 12 February 2009. In the case of NN, the court quashed the renewal of NN's control order. The quashing took effect on 24 November 2008 as set out in the last quarterly statement. In the case of GG, the court upheld the control order, quashed one obligation and ordered that two further obligations be modified. The Secretary of State has appealed the court's decision to quash one of the obligations.
	Two controlled persons applied to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal against High Court judgments in the substantive reviews of their control orders in this reporting period.
	A judgment was handed down by the Court of Appeal in the case of Secretary of State for the Home Department v Abu Rideh on 17 December 2008 in which the appeal made by the Secretary of State was stayed.
	The House of Lords heard the appeals in the cases of AE, AF and AN between 3 and 9 March 2009. The outcome of that hearing will be reported when judgment is available.
	Full judgments are available at www.bailii.org/.

Transport: Snowfall

Lord Adonis: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Geoff Hoon) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I would like to update the House on the process carried out to deal with the coldest winter the UK has faced for almost 20 years and in particular the heavy snowfalls experienced in early February across large parts of the UK, and how the Government propose to work with partners to identify and address the lessons.
	First, I want to thank all of those who worked very hard in the transport sector and beyond over the past few weeks to minimise the disruption caused by the recent severe weather. Many people worked long hours throughout the period to maintain vital road and rail links, to keep airports open, to provide a whole range of essential services and to mine and deliver new supplies of salt for treating our roads. I am pleased that this hard work kept the country functioning during that recent period of severe weather and its aftermath.
	The heavy snowfall had an impact on all parts of our transport systems. The robust efforts of the Highways Agency allowed the strategic road network in England to remain operational over the whole period. Although there were some closures due to road traffic accidents, they were cleared as quickly as was possible given the conditions. In cities, very heavy snowfalls created conditions which made driving very hazardous and at their worst led to the suspension of public transport.
	On the main rail network, again, most train operating companies were able to continue running services albeit that on occasion services were disrupted. In particular, services from the south of London into London were disrupted from 2 February by the snow because of the use of the third rail to power the trains. Further snow later that week caused more problems for routes into London from the north and services across the south-west. In the following week, snowfall across the Midlands, the east and the north caused further disruption.
	Across the country, the weather had a significant impact on the national road network. Some parts of the national infrastructure, such as the Severn crossing and sections of road such as the A38 near Exeter, were particularly affected. I am grateful for the efforts of the authorities, which were able to restore these to running efficiently, through hard work and prudent management of the risks involved.
	The weather also posed operational challenges to UK airports. Operations were on occasions suspended, with problems on public transport and local roads making it more difficult for travellers to get to and from the airports. Regional airports and those in the south-east of England responded admirably. The impact of the snow was particularly significant at Heathrow, where the fact that the airport is currently running at 99 per cent capacity has shown both the creativity and resilience of the airport operator and the need for further runway capacity.
	The cold spell presented challenges to both the Highways Agency and transport authorities around the country which needed reliable supplies of salt to keep roads flowing smoothly. Stocks of salt were heavily called upon. Salt stocks around the country varied significantly as local highway authorities had made different decisions about the levels of reserve required. Some local authorities chose to keep very high level of stocks, running as high as 25 days in some cases, whereas others chose to operate with leaner reserves. While the latter approach is of course appropriate in a normal year, it does leave the relevant authorities exposed to abnormal weather events. As a result, in some cases stocks of salt became very low.
	The Government and, in particular, the Highway Agency took a lead role in helping those local highway authorities which experienced difficulties with shortfalls in their salt levels. Mutual aid between authorities and with the Highways Agency helped to make sure that traffic kept flowing smoothly; for example, the Highways Agency stepped in to ensure salt deliveries over the weekend of 7 and 8 February at a time when salt suppliers would not normally have made deliveries. The Highways Agency was also flexible in running down its stocks to help prioritise supplies to local authorities with very low reserves.
	The UK has, of course, not seen snow falls like those of early February for at least 18 years. The good news is that no highway authorities ran out of salt. The fallback measures on the whole worked, and worked well. But we need to make sure we address those aspects that did not go well.
	The House of Commons Transport Select Committee is undertaking a short review of the effects of the recent adverse weather. The Greater London Assembly is looking at how London's transport system responded. Individual local authorities will be undertaking their own lesson identified exercises.
	But I am keen that all the agencies involved in winter servicing take the opportunity to identify and address the lessons. I have therefore invited the UK Roads Liaison Group (UKRLG)—a partnership of central government, devolved Administrations, trunk road authorities and local authorities—to review the lessons that can be learnt from recent events and to recommend what steps could be adopted by local highway authorities, trunk road authorities, producers of salt and other stakeholders to ensure the effective treatment of England's road networks in order that we are even better prepared should similar events occur in future years. I would expect that this advice of UKRLG will also be of benefit to the devolved Administrations.
	I am placing a copy of this letter and the suggested terms of reference for the review in the Library of the House.
	By working together we will ensure that we are even better prepared in future for responding to the challenges of the winter months.